>> I suppose that many users returned back to 2.6 for this reason.
>> There should be a clear warning that saving is still possible, only
it was renamed to "overwrite".
>> IMO, the intention of the authors was to educate the users and
remind them that at the opening of a file, the data are internally
converted to the working format, and at the saving they are converted
back to original format. But this intention missed its goal, because the
user is not informed what and why was changed, and when he sees that the
application behaves in a weird and user-unfriendly way, then the
simplest solution is to downgrade back to the last sane version.
> I think the real intention was to prevent the user from accidentally
writing to a file format that throws away any layers which have been
created and other useful image information.
Which is in other words the same what I wrote, or at least what I wanted
> It's a shame to revert to 2.6 just for this reason. You miss out on a
LOT of new functionality
For an average user, GIMP already has everything what we need. But it
does be a shame that many of us were forced by this unfortunate change
to revert to 2.6.
> and all you've really done is save yourself the minor trouble of
learning a different save hotkey combo.
Of course, once I know that saving is still possible, it is only a minor
nuisance to use it under another name. (This could be repaired without
changing the code, only by a different localization.)
But the serious harm is that when we upgrade to 2.8 and see that "save"
does not behave in the expected, logical and traditional way (as it ever
behaved in previous versions and as still behaves in other applications
(for example Inkscape)), that is to save to the file which was opened,
then we consider this version broken and cannot guess that this function
was only hidden on another place and under a different name.
My first reaction was exactly the same as of the user who started this
thread: to downgrade to 2.6, and so I suppose that we two are not the
only ones who did so.
The only reason why I did not give up and continued to search for
further information about this change (and why I joined this mail-list)
is that for me, the GIMP was always a flag-ship of open-source
applications and one of proofs that they are better that the commercial
ones, because they are written by the users who know what they need. So
I was very disappointed when I found this change of functionality and
was wondering what happened and why. IMO, the usual approach of
open-source programmers is "I need a feature, so I am adding it";
whereas the intention for this change was "I want to prevent other users
to do something; I know better than they what is good for them."
When I "save as" (now "export as") into a format other than xcf, or
"save" (now "overwrite") after opening a file of a format other than
xcf, and then "close view", the warning dialog appears which informs me
that some editions can be lost; so I see no reason why to have separate
menu items for "save" versus "overwrite" and "save as" versus "export
as". But as I already said, this would be not much important if the
users were properly informed about this contra-intuitive change.
gimp-developer-list mailing list
List address: firstname.lastname@example.org
List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list
List archives: https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list